‍Central Asia and The Caucasus Journal

Abstract Russia's military attack on Ukraine and the annexation of the four regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia to the Russian Federation is considered the largest military conflict in Europe after World War II, which explains why the military confrontation between Russia and Ukraine and the annexation of these regions to the Federation makes it necessary. Therefore, the main purpose of this article is to answer the questions that firstly, why Russia decided to attack Ukraine and annexed Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia to the Russian Federation and secondly, what are the causes of the spread of the crisis and the success of these annexations? In response to this hypothesis, the reason for Russia's decision to attack Ukraine and annex these areas to Russia was to eliminate the threats caused by Ukraine's possible membership in NATO, also, the changes in the common values and norms between Ukraine and Russia during the crisis and commonalities and links between the Russian society and the societies of these regions have played an important role in the spread of the crisis and the success of annexations.To answer the research questions, the method of multiple case study and theories of balance of threat and constructivism have been used. The data was also collected in a library method and analyzed with a descriptive-analytical approach. The findings of the article shows that both material and immaterial factors played a role in Russia's military attack on Ukraine and the annexation of these areas to the Russian Federation.

Abstract Although the war in Ukraine is geopolitically a North-North war or Europe's concern but in effect, it is a great power competition between major world powers which is a manifestation of anticipated decline of U.S. hegemony and openly challenging the Pax Americana. In such a situation, the attitude, conduct and performance of involved actors in the war could have a critical consequence for the future of world politics.
This research seeks to apply the future research methodology and the scenario planning techniques to analyze the Russia – Ukraine war and answer these questions: what will be the future scenarios of the Russia – Ukraine war? What consequences this war might have for the future of the international system? Accordingly , 4 scenarios  could be proposed in 3 categories: a) Favorable scenario: Russia-China political-military alliance; containing the US and NATO and changing the rules of the international game; B) Probable scenarios: 1) peace agreement (with the role of actors such as China, Turkey, Israel, France) and changing the order of the structure of the international system, 2) the continuation of war and the continuation of tension in the international order; C) Possible scenario: the risk of nuclear war. The findings of the present study show that the war in Ukraine as a turning point / stimulus affects the international order and after the war in Ukraine, the international system will enter a new era. The implications of this war on the international level will be the polarization of international security and the geopoliticization of international politics. This war has also strengthened the leadership position of the United States at the global level, at the expense of its European partners. 

Abstract After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation, as its successor, gradually began to redefine and reinterpret its identity, national interests and threats to its national security. Meanwhile, relations with the West have always been important to Russia and considered as a challenge in its foreign policy. For nearly three decades, the leaders of the Russian Federation have published a number of strategic documents to represent their identity in the post-Soviet space and to define the roadmap for the country's domestic, foreign, security and military policies. The main question of the article is "What is the position of identity in shaping the security view of the Russian Federation towards the West in post-Cold War era?"In order to find the answer to this question, by using the concept of identity in constructivism theory as well as analyzing the strategic documents published in this country, an attempt has been made to identify and highlight salient and sediment roles –identity of the Russian Federation and determine their role and position in shaping the Russian security view. The main hypothesis of this article is that " role - identities such as being considered as a great world power, a benign hegemon for near abroad countries of Russia (republics segregated from the Soviet Union) and a supporter of Russian-speaking people have had a significant impact on the nature of Russia's security view toward the West and has led to the formation of a threat-oriented view of the West. The present article is based on descriptive-explanatory methodology, and documents and cyberspace resources have been used for the research.
 

Abstract Despite economic entanglements and numerous international disputes, Russia has not abandoned its goal of creating a strategic deterrence against the United States over the past decade. As the result of its efforts, Russia today has access to ultra-supersonic advanced strategic weapons and projectiles that distinguish it from other nuclear powers worldwide. The objectives pursued by this paper are to examine the dimensions and characteristics of Russia's new nuclear deterrence strategy, the reasons for adopted this strategy and its consequences for Russia's relations with Europe and the United States. Accordingly, the present paper seeks to provide appropriate answers for the following questions: "What is the most prominent feature of Russia's new nuclear deterrence strategy?” and “What are its implications for the troika of Russia-EU-US relations?" The author argues that "The ability to pose a direct threat to the United States, rather than a proxy threat to Europe, is the most prominent feature of Russia's new nuclear deterrence strategy that may lead to the proximity of Russia to the European Union and deepening the rift on both sides of the Atlantic. A qualitative method and descriptive-explanatory methodology is employed in this paper and its theoretical foundation is laid on the deterrence (nuclear) theory. 

Abstract Although there are currently no indications of conflict in the Arctic, Moscow's attempts to strengthen its assets and military positions in the region have been interpreted largely as militarism by Western media and political think tanks. However, all Russian strategic documents emphasize on Russia's economic profits being gained through the resources and routes of the Arctic and do not refer to any particular military threat in the region. This literature is to assess the nature of Moscow’s military presence and expansion in the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation, in order to discover its relation with two concepts of military modernization and militarism. Therefore, the author tries to find out the nature of the presence and expansion of Russian military capabilities in the Arctic over the past decade has mainly been based on military modernization or militarism, and its reasons. The basic findings prove that the nature of the presence and expansion of Russian military capabilities in the Arctic over the past decade have been due to Moscow's strategic goals (including defending its sovereignty in the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation against NATO, supporting economic interests and shipbuilding and benefiting them, and formalizing the role of Russia as a major power); based on military modernization and not militarism. Using descriptive-analytical method and relying on a defensive-invasive dualism under the theoretical approach of neo-realization, the author tries to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.

Abstract With Putin's reelection on March 2018, a new era of relations started between Russia and the West. During the period of Putin's presence in the Kremlin, relations between West and Russia have experienced some periods of tension and peaceful concords. In early 1990s, there were prospects about Russia’s becoming a democratic state and becoming part of the normative framework of the West. After the end of the Cold War, Russia sought an equal status in international system and it also was against Western values and normative imposition. The main question of the article is "how the areas of disagreement between the Russian Federation and the West can be assessed?" The author believes that there has been a divergence between Russia and the West’s attitude towards the international system after the end of the Cold War. Russia tries to stabilize its position as a global power ​​and the rejects the existence of its specific spheres of influence that is claimed by the West.

Abstract Following the collapse of USSR, Russia was neglected from a serious attention towards Central Asia and Caucasus countries due to its own internal issues. Therefore a geopolitical vacuum emerged in this region and was followed by the activities of both regional players (including Iran, Turkey and the Zionist Regime); and transregional ones (the US and NATO). The conceptualization of “Near Abroad” in Russia’s national security document in 2015 and Putin’s second presidency, as well as Russia’s political, economic and social ties with Central Asian Republics, all led to Russia’s serious attention once again towards the mentioned Republics, afterward referred to as Russia’s “backyard” or “sphere of influence”. In order to scrutinize Russia’s most important foreign policy challenges, using explanatory – analytical method, the present article attempts to answer the following question:  Which factors are within Russia’s most important foreign policy challenges for expanding its cooperation in Central Asia according to national security document and during Putin’s second presidency? Using defensive realism, the author believes that NATO’s expansion to East, terrorist activities in the region and United States unilateralism are Russia’s most important foreign policy challenges in Central Asia.

Abstract The attempt to retrieve Russia's position as one of the key actors in the international arena can be considered as a major feature of Russian foreign policy after Putin's rise to power. The Kremlin's foreign policy strategy in relation to the revival of the Russian empire and the vulnerable geopolitical situation and the political isolation of the Republic of Armenia have provided the basis for further Kremlin-Yerevan cooperation and promoted relations to the level of strategic partnership. The strategic partnership and the sustained cooperation that the two countries have had after the collapse of the Soviet Union have provided the Kremlin's strategic interests in the Caucasus region.
According to the above matters, the present article aims to study the political, economic and military-security dimensions of Russian influence in the Republic of Armenia. The main question of this article refers to the interests of Russia towards unification with Armenia. Providing Russia's political and security benefits, including dismantling the Western-European political and military infrastructure (EU-NATO) from the region, along with economic interests, has been the main aim of Russia from cooperation and unity with Armenia. In this paper, it has been attempted to examine Russia's interests in unity with Armenia in a descriptive and analytical way, using the balance of threat theory offered by Stephen Walt

Abstract The Collapse of the bipolar international system in 1991, made NATO’s philosophy of existence face some serious challenges. Providing some new interpretation of its role such as global energy security provision, overcoming terrorist activities threats, supporting human rights and democracy as well as combating cyber attacks, NATO managed to survive in post cold war era. Russia has been in opposition to NATO’s expansion in its influence area and considers NATO’s measures in this region as a menace to its national security. Against this background, Russia is known as a potential superpower that can resist against NATO’s military and security policies in many western studies. In this regard, Russia and NATO’s relation during the post cold war era has experienced a wide evolving spectrum from partnership to competition. The present literature scrutinizes the partnership and competition trends in Russia and NATO’s relation during Putin’s governance. The following question is addressed in this article: What trend has been developed by partnership and competition between Russia and NATO? In order to find an answer for the mentioned question, the following hypothesis is being examined that with Putin’s rise to power and his attempt for revivng Russia’s lost position in international system, the competition elements between Russia and NATO were raised upward; so that their relation has reached to its lowest degree today since the collapse of the USSR. The present article is written using explanatory – analyzing research method in a constructivist theoretical framework.      

Abstract   The strategic importance of Central Asian region emerged within the framework or global security challenges following 9/11. NATO engagement in Afghanistan and the US strategic shifts from “energy security" to "fighting against terrorism" in the region, together with its new approaches in various political, military and operational fields within the context of comprehensive theory of "cooperative security" encountered with the formation of Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)and the formation of new regional security arrangement within the context of neo-regionalism theory. These developments indicate the importance of the Central Asia Region in the world politics and amongst major players of these two organizations namely US, Russia and China over the past decade. This article tries to answer the main question by using a comparative-descriptive method: How could security policies of NATO and SCO in Central Asian Region be studied and theoretically compared? The authors believe that, over the past decade, member states of the two organizations have shared tactical interest such as the stability of Afghanistan, the fight against drug trafficking, organized crimes and terrorism, all realized in terms of partnership mechanisms for NATO peace and NATO-Russia council. Therefore, despite the existence of mechanisms of cooperation to achieve tactical shared interests, two organizations disagreed on strategic subject matters such as the long term goals of the US in the region, the expansion of NATO to the East and the controlling and managing energy security in Central Asia. In the meantime, there are some elements such as NATO’s bilateral relationship with some Central Asian countries being affected by China and Russia policies, contradicting goals of major players, and lack of comprehensive institutional mechanism of consultation and cooperation in the two organizations have deepened the differences among them.

Abstract In recent years, the unprecedented development of China and Afghanistan relations and the entrance of China into the domain of Afghanistan political evolutions as a neutral actor indicates China’s endeavor to play an active role in Afghanistan issue after thirty years following the policy of “patient and expectation”. The exit of NATO from Afghanistan in 2014 provided an opportunity for China to adopt a new approach in consideration of geopolitical neighborhood. This view of China, contrary to the past, has transformed china from a supervisor country into a constructive mediator country in Afghanistan. The geopolitical neighborhood approach of China includes four political, strategic, geographical and economic significant traits, and Beijing hopes to remove its concern over political security and commercial economics through this approach in Afghanistan. China’s security concerns along with important changes in geopolitical and geo-economic conditions have obliged it to adopt a more active diplomacy in Afghanistan. This paper attempts to answer the question that what are the features and consequences of China's new diplomacy in Afghanistan? This study hypothesizes that constructive interaction with Afghanistan will develop strategic, economic, and security interests of China that are directly concerned with China’s national security risks and its economic opportunities. In fact, Afghanistan as a fragmented, chaotic and fundamentalist country is against the interests of China and a threat to maintaining stability in the autonomous region of Xinjiang.  

Abstract New security environment of the structure of the international system has led to widespread and common challenges and threats to NATO and Russia as well. Therefore, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has focused its new strategic concept in Lisbon (2010) on the effective activities in three main areas of collective defense, crisis management and security cooperation and emphasizes that the threats of the third millennium has paved the way for NATO's further role in trans-Atlantic alliance and the whole international system and it has necessitated the redefinition of NATO's strategic concept of the alliance and its cooperation with Russia. This research paper attempts to show that due to the emergence of new common threat, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has conducted security cooperation with Russia in areas such as terrorism, Afghanistan and  missile defense shield which has consequently brought the two leading actors of the international system together. Russia and NATO have understood that the new security threats of international security, which in many cases are regarded as the common threats of the two actors, can be investigated and resolved only through cooperative security cooperation. Acknowledging this reality, the new Strategic Concept has enhanced security cooperation between NATO and Russia

Abstract

Abstract          In August 8^th 2008, while Beijing Olympic Games was inaugurated, a military campaign was launched by Georgian troops in South Ossetia. This event should be named the Caucasian 9/11, because it changed the old order and established a new one in the Caucasus. It took place while the United States was involving in the financial crisis, presidential elections and military problems in Afghanistan and Iraq.            NATO's eastward expansion, next to Russian eastern and southern   borders, as well as establishment of a missile defense shield in Poland and Czech republic, just closed to Russian western borders, brought about a very fragile situation to Russian national security. Colored revolutions alongside with  NATO expansion and missile defense shield, has made Russia very sensitive to this trend.         Georgia’s attack to the South Ossetia gave the best pretext to Russia to react seriously to Georgia’s campaign. It is clear that Georgian president had made mistakes and failed to estimate his own possibilities. Western support was not done and the Georgia that was waiting to get help from outside, remained alone.

Abstract Summer 2008 developments in the South Caucasus opened a new chapter in Russia-West relations. Russian invasion of Georgia might have surprised many observers, but for those who had been familiar with the short Post-Cold War history of the region, was an inevitable consequence of Georgian President's (Saakashvili) excesses in agonizing Russia by threatening its internal security, helping Chechen rebellion with military supplies, attempting to get some sort of NATO membership, and embarking upon military invasion of the South Ossetia. Further, American support and some EU Member States' backing for Georgian actions played a great role in the development. Having said that, to many observers disproportionate Russian military offensive meant as a Soviet style appetite for annexing Abkhazia and the South Ossetia and Russia's re-entering into the military confrontation of Cold-War era. Either way, the recognition of the South Ossetia and Abkhazia by Russia and inability of NATO and EU to stop Kremlin have been a matter of concern for the West and many regional countries. In this article while this development will be discussed, the attitude of all sides will be dealt with and finally the conclusion will be presented to the readers.

Abstract With the collapse of the former Soviet Union and dissolution of Warsaw pact, the idea of NATO expansion to the East became an important international issue and posed a major concern for some countries such as Iran, Russia and even China. On the threshold of 21 century, NATO with redefinition, restructuring and determining  new international role and it's new strategies and missions related to the international system, found out it's interest in expansion towards East. Eastern Europe and South Caucuses countries welcomed the NATO's expansion in order to get their security and stabilization guaranteed and their membership to NATO became the main priority. Among the South Caucuses countries, Georgia is more interested toward NATO comparing to other countries in the region and in this connection it has taken more practical steps. As a matter of fact, Georgia expected to be invited in NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008 to be granted full membership, but it didn’t take place. The present article studies and considers Georgia's accession to NATO and it's consequences for other regional actors such as Iran and Russia.